The core of phenomenology is consciousness, whereas the essence of our philosophy is meaning. As it is meaning that allows for the creation of consciousness, this kind of philosophy could be seen as a pre-phenomenological investigation.
Consciousness is born from meaning’s lack. Likewise, meaning is the intentionality of consciousness.
When we see the circular relationship between meaning and consciousness it uncovers the tracks of a progressive way forward for our thought. In fact, by recognising the circular nature of the relationship, we can see that the authentic drive of consciousness is not circular at all, but lineal, from the idea of meaning into Meaning itself.
The traditional, Biblical, concept of existence “I am Alpha and Omega. The beginning and the end,” implies a circularity (recognised by Nietzsche in his idea of the eternal recurrence) that has to pass through the omega or end-point of everything before it can begin again. However, Nietzsche’s sense of circularity is different. Ironically for the author of the Will to Power, eternal recurrence is brought about by a lack of meaningful power at the end-point, rendering it incapable of pulling us forward with enough force to drag us beyond the gravity of nihilistic meanings.
Nihilistic meanings are more dangerous than meaningfulness because they generate a false impression of authenticity, and it is this false sense of reality that dissuades us from looking for any essential authenticity in our search for meaning.
For this nihilistic trap to be overcome, a new perspective of reality has to be fashioned through meaningfulness that envisages a purposeful end-point, i.e. a philosophy that is supported by the perception of a meaningful teleology. This is the basis of our pre-phenomenological task.
pauladkin 
If meaning is subjective, and consciousness derives from meaning, then does that not lead directly to a nihilistic interpretation of life: i.e. “There’s no objective meaning to life, so whatever I invent is the closest I can ever get to any ‘truth’?” Or do you imply that there is an objective Meaning (big M) that’s available for people to find? And wasn’t Neitzsche’s recurrence a model of social process, with each generation recreating itself as the default, through a will to power that has no vision beyond survival of self (i.e. adopts the above nihilism)?
Thanks for the comment. Steven. Yes, I do believe in the objective, authentic Meaning (with a capital M). I think it is indicated by the cosmological evolution toward self-consciousness that is shown in the physics of Cosmological Fine Tuning (Dicke, Rees etc.).
Once we accept that self-consciousness has been a determined objective of cosmological fine tuning our role in the consciousness of the universe points to an ethical duty to develop that consciousness. I’ve tried to champion this complex idea further with further development in the many other posts I’ve got on human purposiveness, and I’m sketching this idea in far more detail in the second part (still unfinished) of my longer work ‘Tracking the Pendulum’. But in summary, I think that a scientifically discernable purposeful path is necessary for human progress and survival and that this way can be charted from the cosmogical reality of Cosmic Fine Tuning.
You need to put efforts when things are not natural. Seeking purpose is not a bad strategy. In fact it is the only strategy to deal with the abyss of absurdness of life.